Page 2482 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 31 July 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
models, including the model promoted by Magistrate Bowles, should be implemented in the ACT. This work will be undertaken in the context of other critical projects, considering models of support, care and treatment for families, children and young people, including: the early support by design work being progressed across the ACT government’s human services cluster; the ACT government’s joint project with the Youth Coalition and three other youth services, working to deliver improved services for young people who are at risk of homelessness or engaging with the youth justice or child protection system; and consideration of modern and best practice models or frameworks for therapeutic protection for young people.
The government, in collaboration with the ACT Human Rights Commission, is reviewing the therapeutic protection provisions to develop options that align with best practice and contemporary knowledge. These options will consider how existing legislation and frameworks can complement work to establish best practice therapeutic care for children and young people and their families in the ACT, including the implementation of the Senior Practitioner Act 2018. The Senior Practitioner Act provides a formal framework for the reduction and elimination of restrictive practices by service providers in the ACT. It has independent oversight of the use of restrictive practice in care and protection services for children.
As I have mentioned, the government has committed $480,000 over the next year to address youth homelessness, in partnership with the Youth Coalition and other community organisations. This funding will support service system improvements to support youth at risk, and will provide respite services and family reconnection services to prevent homelessness in children and young people aged eight to 15 years.
As part of this consultation, I will seek information from my counterpart in Victoria, noting that Mrs Kikkert’s motion states that this model is being considered by the Victorian government. She has provided some further detail in speaking to her motion today. I think it is fair to say that at this point the Victorian government’s position on the matter is not clear. While Mrs Kikkert has outlined some of the work and quoted more recent material from Victoria, spokespeople have previously noted that successful treatment outcomes are dependent on a person being willing, ready and motivated to make a sustained change in their lives. I will certainly be consulting with my Victorian counterparts and with experts from other jurisdictions to ensure that we are fully informed in undertaking this work.
In agreeing to undertake these further discussions, it is important to set out the government’s current position and the evidence that sits behind this. The government does not currently support compulsory treatment. The government takes this position because of a lack of evidence that supports that action at this point in time.
The ACT government only recently engaged in extensive consultations on drug and alcohol treatment in the ACT, as part of the development of the drug strategy action plan. I am advised that compulsory youth treatment did not receive any significant level of support during stakeholder, expert or public consultations. It is because of this extensive process of consultation, which informed the development of the ACT drug strategy action plan for 2018-21, that I will be moving to amend Mrs Kikkert’s motion to remove part 5(c).
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video